The Moody case, in which a judge removed children from their mother in temporary orders stating that the father was “more stable,” continues to move forward at a snail’s pace. I mentioned recently that the jury trial was postponed by the judge based on what appears to be intentional efforts by the opposing counsel, in spite of the fact that the date has long been set, the children need closure, and Heather’s legal counsel are ready for trial.
So while the judge reset the trial date for late November, he has strongly urged the two sides to find a mediated solution. So for the second time, an attempt to mediate will be employed in spite of the fact that Heather’s soon-to-be ex-husband did not appear to have any interest at all in reaching an agreement the first time around. This attitude seems to be in keeping with his early statements that his parents “own the courthouse.”
He also just resigned from his job as an airline pilot, giving rise to questions about his employment and how he plans to earn a living. Apparently he will be working for his parents on their ranch, which gives more credence to the argument that his parents are driving this attempt to get the children, since they are also paying his legal fees.
This is astonishing in light of the judge’s ruling to give him the children in temporary orders based on his “stability.” Some think this may be a tactic on his part to avoid having to defend the fact that his job required him to travel two to three weeks each month should the issue go to a jury as scheduled. I also find it very interesting that Judge Youngblood postponed the trial date until after the general election in which he stands for reelection and is opposed by the local attorney representing Heather Moody.
In fact, THSC PAC has endorsed Hollis C. Lewis, Jr., in the campaign for judge of the 20th District Court. While we rarely endorse Democrats, I have been appalled at the lack of judicial demeanor of Judge John Youngblood in this case. His reference to home school observers in the court as a “mob” while treating supporters of Mr. Moody with respect seems to imply partiality. The fact that his former law partner represented the paternal grandparents and his ruling denying their request to become party to the suit but ruling that when their son traveled they should have the children instead of their mother seemed to be a way to comply with the law but still give the grandparents what they wanted.
While those supporting Mr. Moody deny that homeschooling is at issue in this case, even reporters who sat in on the three days of testimony during the hearing for temporary orders said all the attacks against homeschooling give the impression that this was the reason Mr. Moody and his parents proposed for removing the children from their mother.
Mr. Hollis Lewis is a pro-life conservative Democrat who has family members that homeschool and who has a clear understanding of the fundamental right of parents. As a former district attorney in Milam County for ten years, he knows and understands the law, and he has been a great help in representing Heather Moody. I hope our friends in Milam County and the surrounding areas will contact him at hollislewis@yahoo.com and offer help and support in his election efforts. Justice demands that judges be impartial, and Judge Youngblood has not met that standard, in my opinion.
Please watch the embedded video about the Heather Moody case and join us in praying for her and help in any way you can.
About Tim Lambert
Where did this man’s bitterness come from. It has been from my own personal experience that something like this comes from bitterness. Many times it hasn’t anything to do with the one he takes the bitterness out on. The bitterness tends to be taken out on the person who is closest to the one who is bitter. I have been following this case to some degree and know that this could be my story. Know that you are NOT alone Heather, even though you may feel like you are and that no one understands. Wish there was more that I could do. I completely know the betrayal and understand the devastation. I know your bleeding and grieving heart. And it may seem trivial for people to say that God does truly care, but HE does have something for you on the other side of this!
Thanks Tim. That’s good information to have. I really didn’t know where Mr. Lewis stood on any of his political views. I’m just curious, did Mr. Youngblood respond to THSC’s questionaire?
We contacted Judge Youngblood’s office and asked for a return call to get the questionnaire to him and he did not respond to our call.
While we continue to thank the Lord for Heather’s ability to bear the burden she is bearing, we want not to lose sight of all there is to learn from the case about our dysfunctional family law system. Why? Because any of us could be next. The judge’s urging that the parties mediate a settlement in Heather’s case(even if he has done this 100% in good faith) is a perfect example of family law dysfunctionality at its worst.
Why? Isn’t talking things out the way grown ups operate? Isn’t talking things out the American way?
Let me share why the answer in cases like this has to be “No.”
First, and of least importance, is that it offers the judge a figleaf. In the future if anything goes wrong, all he has to do is say: “But all I did was approve the agreement of the parties.”
This is buck passing — family law cases do it all the time because the “law” in family law is frequently incredibly vague. Judges get off the hotseat we elect them to occupy. They are responsible government servant who should live with the professional consequences of doing the jobs we hire them to do. If they don’t like the responsibility of the jobs, they shouldn’t take the jobs.
More importantly, when people “negotiate” in these cases what really happens all too often amounts to one of the parents being forced to “negotiate” … at knifepoint. When you are ambushed in a dark alley and offered the choice to hand over your wallet or face the consequences of not cooperating … well, that can be labeled “negotiating”. But for someone that likes truth in labeling, it is difficult not to see that it is a lot more like extortion than negotiation.
The point to lay hold on and never release is this: HEATHER MOODY HAS NOT WRONGED HER SPOUSE. SHE DID NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, ABANDONMENT, CRUELTY, OR ABUSE/NEGLECT. She is charged with NO wrongdoing … and yet she is in court facing all kinds of devestating potential loss. Why?
And so the good judge suggests the parties … “negotiate”. (Yeah, right.)
Why?
What we need to understand is that a new version of Heather’s scenario happens dozens of times a day, five days a week, in county courts all over the state — and 3,000 times a day, five days a week, in courthouses all over our nation. Start adding that up. It adds up to a well-documented, immense loss of health (to families, parents, and children) and wealth (divorces exactly like what Heather is enduring are one of the three leading causes of bankruptcy in America).
As kids like to say: “Man, that’s messed up.”
Out of the mouth of babes …
I have a question. If Mr. Hollis is elected to the bench, does that mean Heather will need to get a new attorney by her trial date?
No, he could still represent her along with her primary attorney from New Braunfels.
Totally off the subject of the case. Mr. Lewis can not be Pro-Life and run as a Democrat. The laws of physics do not allow it. When Mr. Lewis filed as a Democrat, part of that filing fee went straight to the “Pro-Murder,” Democrat Party. No matter his personal feeling on the subject, that is a fact. If even one penny goes to support abortion, you are not Pro-Life. Not to mention all the other evil he is supporting in the Democrat Party. He is at the very least, a go along to get along person. And because he can not stand for what is right in politics how would you believe he could make a moral ruling from the bench. I hope justice prevails in this case. My prayers go out to the children.
Derik,
Believe it or not there are pro-life Democrats especially in the rural areas of Texas. Mr. Lewis has stood for these children and their mother in the court of Judge Youngblood, who in spite of being a Republican has taken this mother’s children from her and placed them with a father who is gone as much as 3 weeks per month, because, claimed the judge, “he is more stable.” The voters of Milam County need a judge who will be fair and impartial.
The Judge ruled the family structure in the children’s interest to be more stable with the father and his family for a reason. I would not suggest knowing what those reasons are, but knowing Judge Youngblood I would hazard to guess that those reasons were not taken lightly and I would further suggest to you that Mrs. Moody has not and is not being totally honest about the situation.
By the way, I also know Mr. Lewis and I doubt anyone who knows the two of them would support your claim that Mr. Lewis is the more conservative of the two. What you have presented here is a nice hit piece; however, before you endorse a candidate I suggest you look into that candidate’s background. I think you might be surprised of the skeleton’s hiding in that closet!
I find it difficult to understand how a father who is gone 2-3 weeks per month is more stable than the fit mother who has been a stay-at-home mom for eleven years. We have never stated that Heather is a saint, but your blanket assertion that she is not honest or is hiding something is not supported by a review of the transcript of the three days of testimony in the hearing on temporary orders.
Judge Youngblood refused to return our call requesting information in making our endorsement decision. Therefore we are left to assess him as a judge based on his record. His actions in this case lead us to the conclusion that his is not fair and impartial.
I was really upset when I read this and then I noticed this group was paying to have this story advertised on Facebook and I read the other side of the story. It’s disgraceful that you are using children and this family to promote your own political agenda. After the election I would bet you don’t care a bit about the plight of this entire family. They will have served their purpose. Disgraceful.
Fawn, the other side of the story?? We’ve been involved in helping this family since January of this year. Trying to get justice for this mother and her children and we will continue to do so. What’s disgraceful is Judge Youngblood’s taking this fit mother’s children from her. The soon-to-be ex-husband’s claim that “they own the courthouse” seems to be proved by the action’s of Judge Youngblood. He should be removed from office by the voters of Milam County.
While I appreciate your duty as President of the THSC, I also know that Judge Youngblood is a good and respected member of the community and works hard to run the 20th District Court in a professional manner abiding by the law and not rewriting of law as he sees fit. Unfortunately in some cases following the law is not always the easiest of decisions for a judge t follow, but regardless of whether that judge is a Democrat or a Republican, a Liberal or a Conservative, following the law should be their primary concern, not creating or rewriting law.
This divorce is a sad and tragic event as is any divorce in the course of any American family; however, as with any divorce involving children, there are extenuating circumstances that are usually not know by the general public and as with this case are ruled on as a matter of law and not as a matter of the personal opinion of the sitting judge.
You have presented Mrs. Moody as a saint who has been wronged mightily by the court; however, what is the whole story? Do you know? Is she saintly? We don’t know. And what about this third-hand statement the father made as you have reported? Is this the truth? Has Mrs. Moody been completely truthful in this matter? We don’t know that either. That is the job of the jury to determine the status of this case and how it plays out if mediation does not work.
Mediation is a hard concept for many and it is not easy to get through; however, it is successful in many cases and does keep many families out of jury trial situation while keeping many children out of the trauma of having to go into a courtroom.
Family law in the state of Texas is very precise about certain issues and requires them to be handled in the certain manner that is not privy to the spot decisions of the judge in charge. What you have presented here is a compelling argument but it is only one side of the story. There are two sides of the story and the possibility that you have chosen the side that benefits you and your organization regardless of the actual facts of the case comes at the cost of these children.
You suggest the voters of Milam County remove Judge Youngblood who is following the Family Law Code as written by the Lawmakers in Austin and replace him with Hollis Lewis. You have endorsed Mr. Lewis even though he has a history that includes a 1999 reprimand from the Grievance Committee of the State Bar of Texas finding him guilty of Professional misconduct? A Reprimand he received while serving as County Attorney for Milam County.
I know we do not need a judge like that!
Judge Youngblood’s actions and demeanor in this case have not been professional. The fact that he would ask Heather’s attorney if she was responsible for this “mob” referring to those in the courtroom who had come to support Heather is not professional and smacks of a lack of judicial demeanor. He made no such comments when Mr. Moody had observers in the courtroom to support him.
Judge Youngblood is for the second time “strongly urging” the two parties to seek a conclusion of this case through mediation and some have suggested it is because he no longer wishes to deal with this case because his actions have brought publicity to the case. As to following the law, Judge Youngblood rightly denied the maternal grandparents request to become a party to the suit and become conservators of the children. However, his requiring that the children be with their paternal grandparents when the father traveled extensively on business is tantamount to giving them what they wanted in spite of the law.
Should the case not be settled through meditation as the judge so ardently wishes now, the jury will indeed examine the evidence and decide whether or not this fit mother should have primary custody of her children or support Judge Youngblood’s temporary ruling to take them from her and place them primarily with her father.
It is interesting however, that Judge Youngblood postponed this trial till after the general election in spite of the fact that Heather and her attorneys wanted to go forward and resolve this issue for the sake of the children. There is concern that Mr. Moody’s attorneys created a situation specifically to get the trial postponed and Judge Youngblood granted their wish. Just another action by this Judge that leads observers to conclude that he is not fair and impartial.
Bill, you seem like an unusually bright bulb. I would welcome the chance to communicate with you a little about the deep-seated problems of family law (of which this case is but a symptom). We need all the smart, persuasive people we can find to get involved in the reforms that are needed.
Is there some way I can reach out to you?
Hi Bill,
You stated, “Family law in the state of Texas is very precise about certain issues and requires them to be handled in the certain manner that is not privy to the spot decisions of the judge in charge”
This is correct. I ask you look at the ruling once more with a different set of eyes. Like you stated there are two sides to every story. Have you removed yourself from knowing Judge Youngblood and looked at the facts in this ruling?
Heather Moody is my sister, she is an amazing woman and mother and no I did not say “saint”. I and anyone else that looks at the facts can agree that if this would have been ruled in a different city then these kids would be where they belong with their mother.
I know that a Judge that is not able to make a reasonable decision in this type of case with the facts that were presented for whatever reason he/she might have had should not have the responsibility to protect the children of Milam County. These kids were totally let down!
Every story has two sides. Justice needs to be for the children. They are not to be used as political pawns to get what you want. They are to be loved and thought of first and foremost. But in an ugly divorce, the parents can only think about hurting each other. The can not see the big picture and the damage they are doing to the children that God was kind enough to grant them.
Hi Fawn,
You are absolutely right that the parents should think of the children. I can tell you first hand that is all my sister has thought about. My sister is a wonderful mother and what would have been best for these children is to leave them with Heather. There was no urgent reason to remove them from what they have known their whole lives on a “temporary basis” until the final decision was made. Since this started and Judge Youngblood made his decision, the kids were removed from a public school they did very well in to another public school and then to a private school all within a year. Like a kid going through a parents divorce and being removed from the primary parent was not enough. I can tell you I would have never thought this could even be a possibility and this experience has left me with little confidence in the family court system in general. There should be more checks and balance, to ensure this can not happen. When discussing when a trial would be set after the children were removed from my sister, the opposing side wanted to extend it out to the latest date possible and it broke my heart when the judge stated he could care less what date they set for the trial. Three kids are involved, their worlds have been turned upside down and the one person who shoud care how long it takes does not. Totally let down!
Furthermore this is not about Mr. Lambert using children as political pawns to get what he wants, it is the complete opposite. This is about ensuring this terrible thing does not happen to other children and families. As you mentioned children are to be thought of first, so I would ask you look at the facts- not hear say or what you have heard in this case and then answer if that was indeed what happened.
Was there any urgent need to pull these children out of a very stable environment on temporary orders until the final ruling. Much of the childrens suffering could have been minimized during this ordeal. You are free to your opinion, however I assure you that if you knew the truth and were open to see the facts you would hold a different opinion.
I was completely blown away by the judges decision, to take three happy children away from a very fit mother. Especially, as he is a father of a little boy. Things like this don’t happen often.
Ms. Simpson:
There is, of course, a lot of room for disagreement about various ideas that are at work in our society. Some of those ideas may not be resolvable. Often there are ways to come to conclusions about those ideas that are actually correct — leaving the other side needing to change their ideas or stay stuck in their error. The situation as a whole with the dysfunctionality of family law is one of those situations in which people remain free to disagree despite the weight of the evidence and mere logic leading to conclusions that rational people must accept. Freedom to remain ignorant is part of freedom means — and there really isn’t anything to be done about that by those who don’t choose to remain ignorant. The rest of us just smile and get along because in our way of life we have lots of unresolved (and a little unresolvable) opinion living side by side.
It is quite a different matter, however, when the disagreements are not about issues but about attacks on people’s character. And that is the reason for this note. Your comment about Tim Lambert (and, by implication, the THSC Board of Directors and THSC’s membership) goes beyond being merely ignorant. It is beyond the pale. Foul! Penalty flag on the ground. You owe all of them an apology.
I don’t think, I KNOW, that your comment regarding THSC using that family is 100% wrong — no ifs, ands, or buts. Flat out, totally, no-room-for-difference-of-opinion Wrong. The people you insulted have zero to gain from what they are doing. They do it because they know the difference between right and wrong and know when something is so egregiously wrong that it demands setting aside personal interest and thoughts of gain in order to go help do something about fixing that egregious wrong. If what is being done to a parent — such as Heather Moody — isn’t wrong in this case, then none of us knows what wrong is … and all that’s left is political power and that’s a formula for Hell on earth.
The people you insulted are trying (quite selflessly) to do something about — not whine and complain but really do something about — about Hell on earth. What they are trying to do is for everyone’s good, including people who don’t have a clue about what the problems are. You are free, of course, to join the battle in the public forums our system of governement provides. But you could not be more out-to-lunch in your comment about Tim’s, THSC’s Board, and THSC’s membership’s motivations.
As you aren’t an attorney Mr. Lambert and apparently don’t know the laws; Mr. Youngblood as a Judge has taken an oath which includes not being able to comment on cases pending in his court. So respectfully, even if you did contact his office, he would only be able to say “no comment.”
“Jane”,
Our request was in not in regard to the case, but as to our PAC’s endorsement process and as a candidate he can certainly speak to voters and those who wish to ask questions of candidates. Obviously he chose not to do so.
“Jane”
He sure did take an oath which is why I would have never guessed in a million years the Judge would have made the ruling he did based on the facts presented.
Mr. Lambert,
So, you might could understand that being “endorsed” by your PAC in Mr. Youngblood’s position wouldn’t be in his best interest either; as it might then appear he was being partial to your client. Let’s evaluated all the sides of the apple here, because this isn’t a simple matter of apples and oranges.
“Jane”:
The good Judge chose not to respond to the PAC’s entirely legal, rather-run-of-the-mill candidate vetting process. That was perfectly fine. It is also perfectly fine for the PAC to endorse the opposing candidate who agrees with positions the PAC endorses. Nothing is going on here that is not well within the boundaries of the law. If the Judge had chosen to work with the PAC’s vetting process, that would have been equally within the boundaries of the law. It was up to him to decide whether or not he was interested in the endorsement. Apparently, he was not.
As to how it “might appear” … judges and all elected officials have to deal with this all the time and they develop very thick skins about it. The good Judge was almost certainly not in the least worried about how it would appear. He simply made a politicat decision regarding his political career … and that’s just fine. If it plays out his way, he will have been proven right in his calculation (for now). If not, he will have been proven wrong. The electoral process is working exactly how it has been designed. We all teach our children about Choices and Consequences. It is a good life lesson.
Praying for Heather, as I have some idea what she is going through. I lost the right to homeschool my children (after doing so successfully for seven years), though evidence was never even sought about my fitness or lack thereof. This was in the 309th family court under Republican Judge Frank Rynd.
Heather is unbelievably strong person, with a verry positive attitude. She is an amazing mother of three polite, social, friendly, smart and adorable children. I have taken a lot of advise from her about homeschooling for my two boys, who look up to her children. Her children have such an amazing positive influence on my children. However, in the last few months I have noticed some change in her children.
I keep praying for her and for a happy ending of this nightmare. I am praying that really soon she can be reunited with her children again, who so desperately need each other. Growing up without a mother, even though I have an extremely loving father, I know there is nothing worse than a child separated from a mother.
How very sad indeed. The consequences of divorce are far-reaching and exceedingly destructive. This case is no exception. In fact it is magnified because all the people involved are so “close to home” to those of us here in Milam County.
Home schooling is legal in Texas. It would be judicial suicide to rule against the mother in this case solely on the fact that the children have been home schooled, especially in light of the fact that the decision to home school was a joint one. Those of us who know Judge Youngblood find it highly unlikely that this is the case.
On the other hand, the Texas Home School Coalition “does its homework”. They have all the transcripts from the proceedings and, I hope, have had someone in attendance at every proceeding. It would be self-defeating for them to take up the cause for a woman only because she home schools her children — being a home schooling mom does not automatically make you “right”. The Texas Home School Coalition has much more to lose than gain if it doesn’t choose its battles wisely.
I would love to hear this precious child’s solution, as it broke my heart to read this: “Grandpa, I can fix what’s wrong between my mom and dad, but I’m just a kid and nobody will listen to me!”
Reconciliation is something we ALL should be praying for. Moreover, we should all “judge righteous judgment” and pray fervently for this family and for Judge Youngblood.
Elizabeth,
It is indeed sad and THSC does do our homework. We do have all the transcripts and have reviewed them. In a call today from a voter who received our mailing, I was asked what Judge Youngblood’s motives were in removing the children from their mother. My response was that I do not know Judge Youngblood’s motives all I can speak to are his actions, words and demeanor. We became involved in this case because home schooling was being used as a reason to take this mother’s children from her. That was the conclusion drawn by a reporter who sat through the hearings as well.
I also agree that we should pray for reconciliation and Judge Youngblood. However, Judge Youngblood has made clear that he does not want to hear this case. He has for the second time sent this case to mediation strongly urging the couple to find a “creative” solution.
I believe the voters should reach the conclusion that Youngblood should be replaced because of his lack of judicial demeanor and impartiality.